Why social networks are different from other types of networks

M. E. J. Newman and Juyong Park
Phys. Rev. E 68, 036122 – Published 22 September 2003
PDFExport Citation

Abstract

We argue that social networks differ from most other types of networks, including technological and biological networks, in two important ways. First, they have nontrivial clustering or network transitivity and second, they show positive correlations, also called assortative mixing, between the degrees of adjacent vertices. Social networks are often divided into groups or communities, and it has recently been suggested that this division could account for the observed clustering. We demonstrate that group structure in networks can also account for degree correlations. We show using a simple model that we should expect assortative mixing in such networks whenever there is variation in the sizes of the groups and that the predicted level of assortative mixing compares well with that observed in real-world networks.

  • Received 2 June 2003

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.68.036122

©2003 American Physical Society

Authors & Affiliations

M. E. J. Newman and Juyong Park

  • Department of Physics and Center for the Study of Complex Systems, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA
  • Santa Fe Institute, 1399 Hyde Park Road, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501, USA

References (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand
Issue

Vol. 68, Iss. 3 — September 2003

Reuse & Permissions
Access Options
Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

Authorization Required


×
×

Images

×

Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review E

Log In

Cancel
×

Search


Article Lookup

Paste a citation or DOI

Enter a citation
×